NSA Claims Surveillance Programs Aided The Stopping Of 50 Attacks; Details Lacking
from the obfuscate,-obfuscate,-obfuscate dept
In a hearing before the House Intelligence Committee today, NSA boss Keith Alexander once again claimed that the big NSA surveillance programs had stopped terrorist attacks. Rather than the "dozens" he stated last week, today it became "more than 50 potential terrorist events." Of course, as is typical, both the questions (asked by NSA supporters) and the answers were pretty carefully choreographed. Digging in, you find out that Alexander was specifically referring to PRISM, and not the (much more worrisome) dragnet of all phone records. On that program, there doesn't appear to be any actual data on what it was used for. On top of that, when asked about whether or not these programs were essential or necessary to stopping those attacks, as compared to other programs, no one would say that they were necessary or essential.The other careful choice of words was people would ask about whether or not phone calls had been recorded under these particular programs, but not other programs. When Deputy Attorney General James Cole was specifically asked about other programs, he responded that that was classified information. Make of that what you will. Cole also claimed that the program to collect all phone numbers "is not a program that's off the books, that's been hidden away." Of course, if that were true, why are so many people -- including politicians who supposedly have oversight over the program -- so surprised about it? How come there has been no reporting on it? How come, when asked about it, Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper said "no" to whether or not information was collected on millions of Americans? It certainly sounds "hidden away."
Meanwhile, the really shameful performance came from Rep. Mike Rogers, who led the hearing, who again claimed that Ed Snowden both was lying and that his revelations weakened American security by revealing secrets to enemies. And then he pulled out this whopper:
"It is at times like these when our enemies within become almost as damaging as the enemies on the outside. It is critically important to protect sources and methods so we aren't giving the enemy our playbook."So, again, no one understands the programs revealed, because Snowden's leaked info is wrong... and now our enemies know what we're doing... and Snowden is "almost as damaging" as those who wish to attack us. None of that makes any sense at all.
In the end, though, it's more of the same. Even if we could say that these programs were useful in stopping a potential attack, what we don't know is if the program was necessary to do so. We don't know what sort of collateral damage was caused. We don't know if traditional methods of investigation would have worked just as well, with no violations of privacy for Americans. We're just being told on faith to "trust the NSA."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: congress, ed snowden, james clapper, james cole, keith alexander, mike rogers, nsa, nsa surveillance, prism
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More news at [REDACTED].
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Far more likely that such a surveillance program would embolden a dictatorship like Hitler's rather than have prevented it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
coffee mug, bumper sticker, mouse pad...
As to whether he would consider me "within" or "outside", or whether I am "more damaging" than the others, I have no idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Read: government critics
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Totally worth both the price of freedom via the Constitution and the taxpayer's dollar.
/sarcasm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They also have not given us any information about how feasible or destructive any of these attacks could have been. Have they stopped 50 nuclear bombs from going off, or prevented 50 shoe bombers from getting far enough into an airport to get manhandled by the TSA?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Only 50?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And even then, still no.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
We send thousands of soldiers to their deaths and dismemberment and mental fracturing in order to defend our freedoms and yet we'd have a problem when people could be murdered living those same freedoms? Both would be unfortunate endings to otherwise fruitful lives yet we would condemn ourselves to dust based upon a fictional trust?
These are not the freedoms people die for - These are the freedoms you're allowed to live with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
McCarthyism has nothing on terrorism
Well, it took Osama only 1 to make the Americans turn their freedom-loving country into a police state.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Confidence in House oversight?
I saw sharper questioning in recent hearings before both Senate Appropriations and House Judiciary.
This hearing, in contrast, looked to me like it was at least partially intended as a PR exercise, to build up confidence among the public. Of course, the HPSCI members do get classified briefings�maybe they reserve their sharpest questions for the closed sessions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Confidence in House oversight?
I can definitively say that it did not decrease.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Confidence in House oversight?
Rock-bottom to begin with, yes?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who would have thought...
Obfuscate! Obfuscate! Obfuscate!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Terrorist "events"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In other words, "Trust us." with no way to verify.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How many were of their own creation?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In other words, "Trust us." with no way to verify.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Block that!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Shall we discuss the merits of my assertion that you were caught cheating on your exam?
*You are here all day everyday, obviously you have nothing better to do.
*You infringe on copyright yet call everyone else "pirates."
*You promise to leave the blog for a year if Mike would engage you. Mike did yet you are still here.
You don't have any merit therefore merits cannot be discussed with you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That which can be asserted without evidence,
Can be dismissed without evidence.
This ever-growing plot count is utterly meaningless, IMHO. Give us ONE example, or STFU.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Potential Terrorist Events
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hmm...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Hmmm...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Hilarious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Your tantrum over not getting the answer you want is hilarious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hillbillies, morons, and, I don't know, PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY BLOW THINGS UP seem to be on the decline since the 1970s. This Guardian story has the pertinent graphs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And in related news of precisely equal truth value
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And in related news of precisely equal truth value
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What's next....
A) 75
B) 100
C) 200
D) A Billion-Zillion!!! Honest!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's next....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What's next....
Then they started including biological and chemical weapons in the category. You might be able to make the case for certain biological weapons (certainly not anthrax, though), but not chemical weapons.
Now, apparently, a WMD means anything that can kill more than three people at a time, or anything that explodes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
P0wned - in well fell swoop. Your DNA please.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We know at least some of the collateral damage cause by these programs...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My copy says no warrants shall be issued except upon probable cause. I can't find the section that says except when the NSA says pretty please.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jimmy Status
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Jimmy Status
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course the NSA sees things as slightly crooked compared to the average person who has far less paranoia. What I don't see is claims that the recent Boston Bombing brothers, which Russia warned them of with much time to actually deal with it and dropped the ball. All this information gathering and spying did not aid in any manner the apprehension to prevent such an act from occurring.
Again, politicians are dancing around but not really addressing the topic at hand with the unvarnished truth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sure!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I trust them!
I trust them. Of course I trust them. I trust them to ignore the laws of the land and just do what they want to do "for the greater good" (for rather oddly defined values of "good"). But trust does not equate to respect or even ambivalence; trust is that you feel confident in knowing what choices they'll make.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"It is at times like these when our enemies within become almost as damaging as the enemies on the outside."
Since from this article, I see no definition of "enemy within", I ass-ume that he was referring to himself and other like minded people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NSA Transcript - fresh off the press.
...Beta: Chocolate, I smell chocolate!
Gamma: I'm getting prunes and denture cream! Who are they?
Beta: Oh, man, Master will not be pleased. We better tell him someone took the bird. Right, Alpha?
Alpha: [in a squeaky voice] No. Soon enough the bird will be ours yet again. Find the scent, my compadres, and you too shall have much rewardings from Master for the toil factor you wage.
Beta: Hey, Alpha, I think there's something wrong with your collar. You must have bumped it.
Gamma: Yeah, your voice sounds funny!
[they both laugh]
Alpha: Beta! Gamma!
[they both stop laughing]
Alpha: Mayhaps you desire to - SQUIRREL!
[All of them turn their attention to a nearby tree; slight pause, Gamma whimpers]
Alpha: Mayhaps you desire to challenge the ranking that I have been asigned by my strength and cunning...
Beta: No, no, no. But maybe Dug would. You might wanna ask him.
Gamma: Yeah. I wonder if he's found the bird on his very special mission.
Alpha: Do not mention Dug to me at this time. His fool's errand will keep him most occupied. Most occupied, indeed. Ha ha ha! Do you not agree with that which I am saying to you now?
Beta: Sure, but the second Master finds out you sent Dug out by himself, none of us will get a treat.
[He and Gamma whine]
Alpha: [lunges and growls at them] You are wise, my trusted lieutenant. ...
-----
And now you know exactly what your tax dollars get you and just how 'successful' they are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Really sounds worthwhile.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The playbook?
You mean the playbook detailing "how to rape your citizens constitutional rights without letting them know" ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Even if that was the case, the only reason it (hypothetically) worked was because the terrorists, like the American public, were unaware that their every action was being recorded for future reference.
Given that PRISM is now publicly known, how can its continued existence be justified? "It stopped terrorist attacks in the past" is insufficient, because now terrorists know to avoid being monitored by it.
Offhand, I'd say the NSA is due for massive budget cuts. They're clearly overfunded and desperate to remain that way. The NSA's budget is classified (of course), but a bit of searching shows that it was around $8 billion in 2008, with a few pundits estimating it to currently be at least $10 billion. $5 billion would probably be more appropriate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why's he so scared of dissenting views? Hmm...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mr. Freedom hates that his constituents even know this link exists.
More to come!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike hates this post so much that he's going out of his way to censor it: http://tr.im/44w44
the next edition will be out very soon.
How hard will he work to hide that from you too?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
seemmiseeyou
[ link to this | view in chronology ]